UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. ARUMUGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE insurance company which figured as the second respondent before the Tribunal has preferred this appeal against the award of Tribunal dated 30.04.2002 made in M.C.O.P.No.764/2001 awarding a sum of Rs.7,30,251/- as compensation to the first respondent herein/petitioner.

(2.) THE first respondent herein filed a claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the appellant herein and the 2nd respondent claiming a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries allegedly sustained by him in an accident that took place at 4.00 a.m. on 10.01.1998 near the railway gate at Thiruvathigai, within the jurisdiction of Panruti Police Station. It was the contention of the 1st respondent herein/petitioner before the Tribunal that on 10.01.1998 at about 4.00 a.m. he was standing on the extreme southern side of the Cuddalore-Chittoor Main Road near Thiruvathigai railway gate that while he was so standing, the second respondent's tractor bearing registration No.TN-32 Z-1020 fitted with a trailer bearing registration No.TN-32 Z-1021 came there at a high speed in the direction of east-west, driven by its driver rashly and negligently without following traffic rules and caused the accident by hitting against the first respondent/petitioner that due to the accident the petitioner sustained multiple injuries including fracture of the pelvis bone and dislocation on the right hip that the first respondent/petitioner initially took treatment as an in-patient in Government hospital, Panruti, then at Government hospital at Cuddalore and thereafter in private hospitals at Cuddalore, Pondy and Chennai and that despite proper treatment, the injuries resulted in permanent disability and consequential loss of earning capacity.

(3.) THE Tribunal conducted enquiry in which two witnesses were examined as P.W.1 and P.W.2 and twenty five documents were marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P25 on the side of the first respondent/petitioner. No witness was examined and no document was marked on the side of the appellant insurance company.